Tatsuya Oki: How to Respond to Land of Unknown Ownership

2025/07/14

Measures against the problem of land of unknown ownership have been discussed and legal reforms have been implemented from the perspectives of preventing the occurrence of land of unknown ownership and facilitating the utilization of land.

From the perspective of prevention, inheritance registration became mandatory on April 1, 2024, and registration of changes in address, name, or title will also become mandatory starting April 1, 2026. Additionally, the System for Returning Inherited Land to the National Treasury, which allows land with no utilization needs to be returned to the national treasury under certain requirements when inherited, has been in effect since April 27, 2023.

From the perspective of facilitating land utilization, the 2021 Civil Code amendment created a new Management System for Land and Buildings of Unknown Ownership, which has been in effect since April 1, 2023. As the author has actually used this system and experienced its ease of use, I would like to introduce the details of this system as one countermeasure for land of unknown ownership.

Specific examples where land of unknown ownership becomes a problem include cases where land acquisition for public or private projects cannot proceed because part of the land has an unknown owner, cases where a person wants to purchase and manage an adjacent property that is poorly managed because the owner is missing, or cases where a person wants to confirm boundaries with adjacent land to sell their own land but the owner of the adjacent land is unknown.

In such cases, the use of existing systems such as the Absentee Property Management System (cases where the owner is known but their location is unknown) or the Inherited Property Management System (cases where the owner has died and there are no heirs) could be considered. However, in both cases, an application could only be made by an "interested party," and a person who simply wished to purchase the land did not necessarily qualify as an interested party. Furthermore, because these systems cover all of the person's property including the land in question, placing a heavy burden on the manager, the applicant sometimes had to bear a deposit of nearly 1 million yen (to be used for the manager's remuneration, etc.), making the cost burden non-negligible.

In contrast, under the newly created Management System for Land and Buildings of Unknown Ownership (Article 264-2 et seq. of the Civil Code), the applicant must similarly be an "interested party." However, for example, the Q&A published by the Osaka District Court lists examples such as "owners of adjacent land who risk suffering disadvantages because the land or building of unknown ownership is not properly managed," "implementers of public projects who intend to acquire the land for more appropriate management," and "private prospective purchasers whose purchase plans are specific and who have a recognized interest in the use of the land and building."

The system applies to "land (buildings) for which the owner cannot be identified or whose location cannot be identified." This includes cases where the owner cannot be identified at all, cases where the owner is missing, cases where the owner (registered titleholder) is deceased and there are no heirs, cases where the heirs are missing, or cases where all heirs have renounced the inheritance. Before applying, it is necessary to conduct a thorough investigation into the location of the registered owner, the existence of heirs, and the location of heirs if they exist.

Furthermore, because this system specializes in the management of the specific land or building of unknown ownership in question, applications can be made at a lower cost than traditional property management systems. In a case experienced by the author (a case where an adjacent landowner wished to purchase a detached house that had been vacant for several years after the owner died without heirs), the deposit was 300,000 yen.

Once the court appoints a manager and a management order is issued, the right to manage and dispose of the land and building belongs exclusively to the manager, and the manager can sell the land and building with the court's permission. Attorneys and judicial scriveners are often appointed as managers, but in cases where the application was made for boundary confirmation, a land and house surveyor may be appointed.

In the case mentioned above experienced by the author, a management order was issued and an attorney was appointed as manager about three months after the application. The sale was completed about six months after the management order was issued, and the applicant successfully acquired the adjacent land and building that had been vacant for several years. Since the manager's remuneration is paid from the sale proceeds, the deposit was returned almost in full.

There were no particular issues in terms of procedures, and the reduced cost burden made it easy to gain the applicant's understanding. I personally felt that it is a very easy system to utilize.

The manager also commented that they felt the system is overwhelmingly less burdensome and easier to use compared to other property management systems where they must manage all types of property such as other real estate, deposits, and debts. They mentioned they are handling two other similar management cases and expect the use of the system to increase further in the future.

The Management System for Land and Buildings of Unknown Ownership enables acquisition under efficient procedures with a reduced financial burden, even in cases where one would have had to give up on acquiring the land under previous systems. It is a system expected to be utilized in various situations related to land of unknown ownership in the future.